Teams

EAnderson (Queens)

2025 Singles 18 & Over League · 18 & Over Singles 3.0 Women

7 players · average NTRP 3.12 / NORTH CAROLINA

View scouting list →
Schedule9 played
2025-07-22Won 10
W#1 SinglesDevon Fuller vs Jessica Zhang6-0, 6-3
2025-07-08vs MGross (Queens)Won 10
W#3 SinglesMadelynn Bates vs Zahide Marenic6-1, 3-6, 1-0
2025-07-02vs MABullock (Raintree)Won 30
W#1 SinglesEmilia Anderson vs Chelsea Law6-0, 6-0
W#2 SinglesEmma SEGAL vs Kinzie Bashline6-2, 6-0
W#3 SinglesRACHEL Patterson vs Mary Anne Bullock6-2, 6-4
2025-07-01vs JMugnano (Park Road)Won 20
W#1 SinglesDevon Fuller vs Emily Pansa6-0, 6-3
W#2 SinglesMadelynn Bates vs Paige MacEra4-6, 6-3, 1-0
2025-06-25vs EKennard (Park Road)Lost 01
L#2 SinglesDevon Fuller vs Cynthia Hoover1-6, 1-6
2025-06-17vs KCronin (Piper Glen)Won 10
W#2 SinglesDevon Fuller vs Kathy Harborne6-1, 6-0
2025-06-10vs ASu (Life Time)Won 20
W#1 SinglesDevon Fuller vs Mallory Burns6-4, 6-1
W#3 SinglesMadelynn Bates vs Anait Balasanyan6-2, 6-3
2025-06-03vs KGibson (Raintree)Won 10
W#1 SinglesDevon Fuller vs Summer Nunn6-0, 6-0
2025-05-28Won 10
W#3 SinglesDevon Fuller vs N/A6-0, 6-0
A tie can be incomplete. Tell us if someone is missing.
i
Grouped by tie — one fixture, several lines. A line shows only when a player on it is someone we have indexed, so an early-season tie for a newly-added team can look short. This also means the line count here will not match the header, which counts individual player appearances.

Flight standings for 18 & Over Singles 3.0 Women have not been collected yet. Where we have them we show every team in the flight ranked, with this team highlighted. The crawler is still filling in older seasons and flights.

ScoutingWhere each opponent usually plays

Signed-in extra: whether this captain plays strict strength order or mixes it up, from every doubles line they have put out. Create a free account to see it.

Roster averages 3.01 estimated across 7 rated players. No lineup is published in advance, so the column below is where each player has actually been used — a captain's habits are the best available forecast. Sign in and claim your record to see who you have played.

3.32
Devon Fuller
usually #1 Singles 57%, also #2 Singles 29% · published 3
3.31
CC Shellabarger
published 3.5
3.10
Emma SEGAL
usually #2 Singles 100% · published 3
3.05
Emilia Anderson
usually #1 Singles 100% · published
3.00
Madelynn Bates
usually #3 Singles 67%, also #2 Singles 33% · published 3
2.66
RACHEL Patterson
usually #3 Singles 100% · published
2.65
Julia Orski
published
Established pairs

Doubles pairs from this roster with three or more matches together anywhere — ordered by performance against what the rating gap predicted, not by record.

Emma SEGAL + Emilia Anderson7168% games+8.6% vs expected
Emma SEGAL + Devon Fuller404 matchesnot enough data
Roster

Ordered by our estimated dynamic rating, which is why two players at the same published level are not tied — a published 4.0 says nothing about where inside the band someone sits. Lines played in this team’s season are shown beside each name.

3
Devon Fuller
96W–37L career · 7 lines in 2025
<1%1%99%
3.32
3.5
CC Shellabarger
7W–1L career · no lines in 2025
1%90%8%
3.31
3
Emma SEGAL
28W–5L career · 1 line in 2025
<1%24%76%
3.10
Emilia Anderson
37W–9L career · 1 line in 2025
0%<1%>99%
3.05
3
Madelynn Bates
53W–35L career · 3 lines in 2025
<1%49%51%
3.00
RACHEL Patterson
5W–6L career · 1 line in 2025
12%87%1%
2.66
Julia Orski
3W–4L career · no lines in 2025
14%85%1%
2.65

Three percentages are where each player stands right now: the chance they are below their band, inside it, or above it, on the way they are playing this season. The number on the right is our estimated dynamic rating, which USTA never publishes. This is today rather than a forecast of December, because a forecast has to assume future matches and cannot know whether someone will even be offered them. Percentages are blank where a player has too few matches this season, or at a level where the model does not yet beat a base-rate guess; the estimate is a weaker claim than a probability and survives where those do not.

Not affiliated with or endorsed by the USTA. Ratings labelled as published are USTA year-end figures; anything we describe as an estimate is ours, not USTA’s. Match data is from USTA TennisLink.